|
Fuzz posted:Yeah the main reason I wasn't active in this thread until he was tossed out was because of those posts about slavery and Islam. gently caress that dude. Why, because the OP got banned? I don't feel like that's necessary. Someone post stuff they've been working on; I've mostly been loving around and not generating anything I'd actually consider a 'project'.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
Megazver posted:Why, because the OP got banned? I don't feel like that's necessary. A new thread for a refresh seems like a good idea if at a minimum because a different OP can be edited with new links, info, tutorials and so on and be more responsive to whats happening in the thread. I think the "helldumping" is a bit overblown.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
That rutibex post is a real doozy
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:45
|
|
|
I fuckin love that they keep repeating in that thread that AI art is art theft and that their 'solution' to that problem is to steal art directly from those artists instead lol. That right there tells me they don't actually give a gently caress and it's just the latest internet thing for them to try to feel self righteous about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
Okay, I guess I am the only one posting stuff here for now. I've just started running Abomination Vaults for PF2e. Generated some options for the PC portraits and the players have mostly picked the ones I don't consider very interesting but it's their portraits, so I'm trying not to be too obnoxious about it.      Ratfolk Wizard, Orc Champion, Fetchling Ranger, Aasimar Gunslinger, Sprite Rogue. Here's a couple of pics that didn't make the cut but which I liked:     And these would have been my personal picks for the Aasimar and Fetchling (with some editing in Photoshop which didn't happen).   Finally, I've given into to the Inescapable Midjourney User Urge to Generate Terrible Wes Anderson Pastiche and generated some cards for the fake Wes Anderson movie about this campaign:        EDIT: Oh yeah, forgot the super hot FemWalken tests:    like dayum Megazver fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
Megazver posted:Okay, I guess I am the only one posting stuff here for now. Those are all fantastic!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 23:21
|
|
|
Dunno if you guys missed it but RPG v5 model is coming along nicely. According to the author it's 80% completed. It's also being training ONLY on public domain stuff, that's free for public domain use (according to the author). I've made so many portraits with this. Players love it. Put some LORAs on that sucker and you can make some nice stuff (for a hobbyist). Here's a few screenshots: https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1465a1f/80_completed/
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Characters for a Gotham 1975 game I just ran...    
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 00:55
|
|
|
Wow that definitely has the 1970s comic book look, even if there's some bad artifacts. Was this on MJ or Stable Diffusion? Mind sharing a prompt or style guide? If it's Stable Diffusion I'd like to take a shot at refining it a bit, for any future superhero games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
Sure. Midjourney In order... 1. https://s.mj.run/mxk0yzY978Q in the style of Neal Adams 2. 1975, Batwoman, in the style of Neal Adams --no cape 3. Tom Selleck, 1975, cheap private detective, young, New York alley, in the style of Neal Adams 4. 1975, a chest-high portrait of Christina Ricci in pantsuit, blonde hair,four color art,in the style of Neal Adams 5. 1975, Arnold Vosloo in sunglasses,bald, leather jacket,1975, four color comic art,in the style of Neal Adams Picking an appropriate period artist is the secret Here is the Ricci prompt with Carmine Infantino swapped for Adams. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 01:13
|
|
|
It's looking probable that we'll be rebooting this thread, and I'm looking for a volunteer to write a new OP for it. Please volunteer here or PM me if you're willing. The OP should introduce the subject (what are AIs, what are the current and upcoming tools, how do they work), and there will be rules written by the mods to be included in the OP. I think a fair introduction to both the tools and the ethical debate as it stands today is a good idea, because that will allow us to point to that summary and say "don't bother just repeating these points" to make it clear what the thread isn't for (re-hashing the same arguments already hashed). I'm not asking an OP to deliver final conclusions on each point of debate, but a reasonable statement of what the issues are and the fact that there is not a consensus on what to do about them. I'm thinking a new thread could go up sometime around Monday, but timing may change (and I'm still saying "probable") because Antivehicular and I have not yet reached a completely clear agreement, although we already have something of a framework and I think we're basically on the same page. We could hold off on a new thread for a bit if you guys want to workshop an OP for longer than that. Absent a volunteer, I can take a stab at a reboot OP myself, but I think some of you have a deeper understanding of the different tools so I think it'd be better to have someone who can describe the technical details.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 05:48
|
|
|
kas posted:I fuckin love that they keep repeating in that thread that AI art is art theft and that their 'solution' to that problem is to steal art directly from those artists instead lol. That right there tells me they don't actually give a gently caress and it's just the latest internet thing for them to try to feel self righteous about. Yeah, I'm pretty  that the arguments seem to overwhelmingly come down to one of:- stealing is bad - then, when the goalposts shift because everyone running tradgames steals art for home use all the time: stealing is bad, but only when you don't credit the artist - then, when the goalposts shift because crediting art in your home game is stupid and/or you can stick to unarguably licensed/public-use sources like Firefly: using generative art is bad because it tangentially normalizes the replacement of real artists and you are obligated to only ethically participate in society It's a good thing this dead comedy forum never has threads about chocolate or cars or Apple devices anything like that
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 06:52
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It's looking probable that we'll be rebooting this thread, and I'm looking for a volunteer to write a new OP for it. Please volunteer here or PM me if you're willing. The OP should introduce the subject (what are AIs, what are the current and upcoming tools, how do they work), and there will be rules written by the mods to be included in the OP. I think a fair introduction to both the tools and the ethical debate as it stands today is a good idea, because that will allow us to point to that summary and say "don't bother just repeating these points" to make it clear what the thread isn't for (re-hashing the same arguments already hashed). I'm not asking an OP to deliver final conclusions on each point of debate, but a reasonable statement of what the issues are and the fact that there is not a consensus on what to do about them. So, Leperflesh, I know you're in a bad position here, and I'm sure this is no fun (you couldn't pay me to be a mod for this site) and I know you're trying to do this in good faith. But this just seems unprecedented. This is like asking someone in CineD to reboot the Marvel Movies thread but please include a section about how Disney engages in IP manipulation and vendor abuse so we can head that off at the pass. Why should there be any ethical debate in the "how to use" thread? Is there any reason? Is there any use? There is going to be absolutely nothing of consequence to arise over debating the AI subject on this forum. That is just a fact. The less-than-three-dozen people who will read this thread and share ideas are not going to bring down the art industry, and it's very unlikely that anybody here is a legislator or mover-and-shaker of any variety. The level of fervor around this topic is really overblown for how insignificant SA is to the world at large. We are not tastemakers here. If you're going to make AI art have a pariah status or allow people to come into the thread and debate people who just want to use the tools to make Elf Pics for their RPGs or board game concepts, then my opinion is that you should honestly lock this thread and ban AI art. This is not a particularly active thread and there are literally hundreds of great resources offsite that are a Google search away. I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally won't miss it too much. And since I only use these tools to make art for personal games, not being able to post it means absolutely nothing to me. Banishment to a place where people are excited and knowledgeable about the topic is preferable to being put in a weird containment zone in hostile territory, in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 07:55
|
|
|
Roadie posted:- then, when the goalposts shift because everyone running tradgames steals art for home use all the time: stealing is bad, but only when you don't credit the artist Don't forget they're never arguing with you and your actual points but this strawman where quote:This happens literally any and every time ai gets brought up and regardless of how you feel about it the same circular arguments happen, where people post the ethical concerns and how this puts artists out of work and how it is training off of artists who don't want that to happen vs "uh I think it's neat though". And it gets bogged down and stuck until someone says to knock it off. That's the real reason it should be quarantined. That's the representation of our position. Yeah sure we're arguing "I think it's neat" (this post is not actually super bad which is why I picked it but, you can see it being really biased towards one side.) Where you can show a process that takes hours and days to do but the next person just still says "it's not valid because you just type some words and hit a button" ignoring the example of very much not that. We're all "techbros" and all we're saying is "it's inevitable, I wasn't going to pay artists anyway." No other argument That's all a caricature and reading what people in this thread have to say immediately shows you it's not at all what most of us are. I could help with a post for a new topic but not in that timeline. I have to work, wrapping up the semester, if I had weeks sure I'd help (but I don't know if I'd wanna be OP. There are areas that would be important for it but I wouldn't be able to contribute much to) But if you wanted something about ethics and I wrote it it would cause a lot more problems than we already have. Maybe something good would be a "How does Common Crawl work?" The process for getting the data.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 08:47
|
|
|
Also, it seems really odd to me to ask for a volunteer to write up a new thread post including a list of rules that they know nothing about. I'm certainly not going to volunteer for it regardless, but if I were of a mind to, that would be a dealbreaker for me. What are the rules the new thread is going to be under? It's hard to see anyone wanting to spend the effort on writing up a brand new thread starter post if the rules are something they really object to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 09:55
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:So, Leperflesh, I know you're in a bad position here, and I'm sure this is no fun (you couldn't pay me to be a mod for this site) and I know you're trying to do this in good faith. But this just seems unprecedented. This is like asking someone in CineD to reboot the Marvel Movies thread but please include a section about how Disney engages in IP manipulation and vendor abuse so we can head that off at the pass. I'm also not a fan of this kind of thing being dictated, as it's clearly in response to a huge overreaction by a vocal minority, but I'm also recalling the OP of my Cryptids And Conspiracies thread where I went out of my way to both talk about the racist nature of many historical conspiracies, and stressed how it was strictly not a QAnon thread. I think both helped to set the tone of the thread and to keep discussion focused and on the rails. Setting the tone that this is to be not only a thread where we post creations that utilized AI tools in their creation, but also discuss the ethics of the technology would set an appropriate tone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 13:37
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:but also discuss the ethics of the technology would set an appropriate tone. Actually no, thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 13:58
|
|
|
Chat GPT is a pretty cool/fun tool to use to analyze and present the motivations and ideals of characters you have written. Here is the backstory I wrote for a villain of mine called Kor, Taker of Widows. Pics (Disclaimer: Not AI Art, They Are Actual Artist Commissions)   Here is my villain backstory written by me: "Kor was the son of Gor, chieftain of the Agarians, a barbarian tribe in the region of the world known as the “Barbarian Lands”. Growing up, Kor was willing to do anything to prove his strength. By the time he was fourteen, he was already a fearsome warrior, favoring the greataxe. As a young man, Kor became the chief war leader and enforcer for his father. He led many raids on other tribes especially against their mortal enemies the Terveri. Soon after Kor grew into manhood, Gor arranged a bride for his son. He was to marry Thesna, daughter of Eretil, chieftain of the Franes, for the price of seven cows. Shortly after making this arrangement Gor passed away peacefully in his sleep and was honored with a great feast. Kor was still mourning his father’s death when he learned that Eretil had broken his promise to marry his daughter Thesna to Kor. He was instead planning to marry her to Agaric, chieftain of the Terveri. Kor gathered his warriors and led a raid into the great hall of the Franes, killing many as they slept. Eretil awoke in time to meet Kor in battle, but the old chieftain was brutally defeated by the powerful Kor. Kor brought Thesna and Ilva, the widow of Eretil, out naked before his warriors. Kor boldly declared that he was “Kor, Taker of Widows''. He and his warriors plundered all the gold and treasures of the Franes, including their livestock and returned to their homes rich in the spoils of their conquest. When the Terveri heard news of this conquest, Agaric came to confront Kor. He entered Kor’s great hall demanding that he release Thesna and give her to him as Eretil had promised. He demanded that Kor release Ilva as well. In response, Kor had his warriors butcher Agaric's men. Kor’s warriors disarmed him and restrained Agaric. Kor then told Agaric that he was going to “cut off his head and drink from his skull” as he decapitated him with one fell swing of his greataxe. Kor rallied his warriors and plundered the Terveri of their women, treasures and livestock. The few Terveri warriors that remained to resist them were disheartened by the loss of their chieftain and surrendered. Kor had each man executed and razed the Terveri village to the ground. Kor, now confident in his supremacy, adopted an ox skull mask as a symbol of his strength. He pillaged neighboring tribes forcing them to pay tribute to treasure, livestock and daughters. Kor, Taker of Widows, is now one of the most feared chieftains in the Barbarian Lands known far and wide for his strength and brutality." Here is Chat GPT after I fed it the story I wrote and writing a scene in which Kor explains his life philosophy: In the dimly lit war tent, the air thick with the scent of sweat and the faint remnants of battle, Kor sat upon a makeshift throne, his imposing figure enhanced by the eerie glow of torchlight. His ox skull mask adorned his face, casting a haunting shadow upon his features. Surrounding him were his trusted lieutenants, battle-scarred warriors who had witnessed the extent of his ruthlessness and power. Kor: (in a low, gravelly voice) Brothers, listen well, for I shall share with you the essence of my life's philosophy. The warriors leaned in, their eyes fixed on Kor, their anticipation palpable. Kor: (his gaze sweeping across his audience) We are the Agarians, forged in blood and fire. We are the embodiment of strength, unyielding in the face of adversity. We conquer and we dominate, for that is our nature. We take what is rightfully ours, and we crush all who stand in our way. The warriors nodded in agreement, their expressions reflecting a shared understanding of their chieftain's words. Kor: (his voice growing in intensity) I am Kor, Taker of Widows, for I have witnessed the frailty of existence, the fleeting nature of life itself. I have seen fathers fall to my blade, leaving their wives to mourn. I have heard the lamentations of widows and the wails of children left fatherless. But in their weakness lies our strength. We exploit their vulnerability, for it is the way of our people. His words hung heavy in the air, a chilling reminder of the brutality that defined their existence. Kor: (his tone filled with conviction) We live by the code of power, by the law of the strong. We seize what we desire, mercilessly. We take the women, the treasures, the very breath from the lungs of our enemies. In doing so, we forge our destiny, shaping the world to our liking. The flickering torchlight danced upon Kor's mask, casting flickering shadows that mirrored the darkness in his words. Kor: (raising his greataxe high) My brothers, we are the harbingers of chaos, the masters of destruction. Our legacy will be written in the blood spilled and the empires we crumble. We shall strike fear into the hearts of all who dare oppose us. Let our enemies cower, let them tremble before the might of the Agarians! The warriors rose to their feet, their weapons clashing together in a cacophony of affirmation. The air filled with a resounding roar, the battle cry of a tribe consumed by a thirst for power and conquest. Kor: (his voice thundering) We are the wolves among sheep, the untamed force that shall reign supreme. Our strength knows no bounds, our will unyielding. Together, we shall carve a path of bloodshed and dominance across these lands, leaving none to challenge our reign! The war tent echoed with the fervor of their conviction, as the warriors bellowed in unison, their loyalty to Kor unshakable. In that moment, they were united by a shared belief in the merciless pursuit of power, pledging their lives to the legacy of Kor, Taker of Widows, the feared and revered chieftain of the Agarians. ....I think it did a pretty cool job, that is actually in line with what I wrote for the character!
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 14:00
|
|
|
Roadie posted:- stealing is bad It's this. At the end of the day this is clearly about people being scared of the transformative impact AI is going to have on all of our lives in the near future and are clutching at straws to find justifications for not wanting to be reminded about it, because it's scary. And to be fair, it is terrifying. A lot of people, not just artists, are going to lose their jobs. This whole thing is going to be the biggest change to society since at least the internet. There's absolutely no guarantee that any of this is going to end up being good for people as a whole. But I don't think letting a loud obnoxious angry minority bully the forum into siloing legitimate content in a containment thread and slapping a bunch of warning stickers on it is the way to go. This forum is for discussing tabletop games, not the impact AI is going to have on society. There are legitimate ethical concerns with Wizards of the Coast too. While we have a specific thread for D&D content, we don't ban people from ever talking about D&D outside of that thread, and we don't demand that the OP of the D&D thread contains a summary of the various ethical concerns people have with Wizards of the Coast. If people are scared and mad about AI and want to talk about that, tell them to take it to an appropriate forum for it. And if they can't hold themselves back from being loud and angry and off topic about it whenever AI happens to come up in a legitimate context, punish them until they stop doing it. Letting a handful of loud obnoxious posters dictate terms is weird.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 14:39
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:It's this. At the end of the day this is clearly about people being scared of the transformative impact AI is going to have on all of our lives in the near future and are clutching at straws to find justifications for not wanting to be reminded about it, because it's scary. And to be fair, it is terrifying. A lot of people, not just artists, are going to lose their jobs. This whole thing is going to be the biggest change to society since at least the internet. There's absolutely no guarantee that any of this is going to end up being good for people as a whole. It's basically like the invention of the printing press but 1000x more scary and possibly volatile.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 14:41
|
|
|
Okay, I checked the shitpost thread again and oh boy. Leperflesh, do you not see how this is getting more and more weird and discriminatory? And it's you who keeps proposing these bizarre new rule changes, like, what are you doing? I must admit, I am starting to feel less and less like "this must be so hard on you, you poor thing" at this point. Your solution for "every time a certain contentious subject comes up, there is a contingent of posters who just can't help themselves but start flame wars" instead of "they should be asked not to do that or do it somewhere else" is "ok, the side that is getting flamed should be confined to their own thread, the other guys should have a hand in writing the OP about how poo poo this thread and what they're doing is, they can't post about this topic outside of that thread, but the other guys still get to waltz in the thread and talk poo poo if the mood strikes them". It's like if vegans* were starting "meat is murder!" flame wars every time someone mentioned meat in the cooking subforum, and your solution is "people can only post about cooking meat in their own quarantined thread, the OP should written by the "meat is murder" people, you can't post about cooking meat in any other thread, but the militant vegans still get to run in every once in a while and unload their grievances if they feel like it". * A little rear end-covering sidenote, I suppose: I've only met a stereotypical militant vegan a couple of times in my life** and even that was online, and while I eat meat myself I have respect for the intellectual position of "killing living beings for food is pretty hosed up". I don't have anything against vegans, it's just I think there are parallels in how the issue generates controversy. (Except the AI Art thing is a lot dumber.) ** Meanwhile, I see people passive-aggressively talking poo poo about people in this thread in other threads with no repercussions on weekly-to-daily basis. ================================================================= In the interest of actually trying to be productive, here's my attempt to come up with something that's actually equitable. I've looked around at the rules in some other RPG-related communities, and /r/callofcthulhu has a reasonable AI Art policy. TL;DR you can sometimes post AI art in other threads but the threshold for what is and isn't a shitpost is pretty high. You shouldn't post "I made some portraits you guys!" but you can post "I made portraits and handouts for this specific published adventure which could also be useful to you." (They've had some arguments about how to handle AI art as well recently and, frankly, handled it better TG has so far.) If you want to post any other AI stuff you made for your own private game you can do this in this thread. The thread should not in fact have the OP written by people who despise the people who will be posting in it, because frankly wtf. If you're confining all posting on this topic in this thread, at the very least you can maybe not make it a hostile environment. If someone wants to talk about how AI Art is Theft or Not Theft, this is also shitposting that's not allowed in the regular discussion threads. I understand that the people who are actually making GBS threads up all the discussion threads, and also for some strange reason you, don't seem to think that it's this poo poo that should be quarantined to its own thread. At this point, I don't see why I am supposed to care. If you can't moderate them, quarantine them to their own thread as well. Megazver fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Jun 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 14:42
|
|
|
That’s actually a good point. If the rule is you can get probed for off topic AI shitposting, you should also get probed for off-topic anti-AI shitposting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 14:55
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It's looking probable that we'll be rebooting this thread, and I'm looking for a volunteer to write a new OP for it. Please volunteer here or PM me if you're willing. The OP should introduce the subject (what are AIs, what are the current and upcoming tools, how do they work), and there will be rules written by the mods to be included in the OP. I think a fair introduction to both the tools and the ethical debate as it stands today is a good idea, because that will allow us to point to that summary and say "don't bother just repeating these points" to make it clear what the thread isn't for (re-hashing the same arguments already hashed). I'm not asking an OP to deliver final conclusions on each point of debate, but a reasonable statement of what the issues are and the fact that there is not a consensus on what to do about them. I wrote the OP for the D&D AI thread when the original ChatGPT thread was gassed and didn't put a rundown of the ethical concerns in that thread. But I didn't need to, people don't need a rundown of the ethical issues surrounding copyright, AI, and theft. People have their opinions on it and the fact is that is has not been resolved legally, and ethically its very subjective. The conversation itself hinges on the fact that copyright is just and should exist, which is something that I reject as a first notion. I understand that I am on an extreme position on this, but I feel that our current copyright regime is extremely restrictive on the other side. The D&D thread immediately went to talking about the ethics of AI because that is an appropriate venue for it. It's a good, interesting, and extremely relevant conversation, but it's better suited for a debate forum. If you read the thread there are two clearly defined positions which IMO both have solid points, but neither is "right." And there is no law right now because this AI stuff blew onto the scene 6 months ago. The luddites had years to spread and resist technology, jam that into months or days and you can see why tensions are flaming. I think you have to reboot the thread and write the OP yourself unless you can find someone to write against what they think is correct. People posting in this thread clearly just think AI is a good way to help them in there TTRPG's, not AI is a good way to destroy artists. It's ridiculous to get mad at somebody for not "commissioning" a piece of art for a TTRPG character like I'm some kind of Italian patrician.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 15:01
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:It's ridiculous to get mad at somebody for not "commissioning" a piece of art for a TTRPG character like I'm some kind of Italian patrician. Lmao that's basically me. Except it does hurt my wallet a bit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 15:06
|
|
|
Megazver posted:Actually no, thank you. I mean, fair enough, though it's going to be part of the discussion whether you want it to be or not. It is worth noting that the forums do specifically have an AI Ethics thread, so folks can always be directed there if the discussion gets more in depth than the thread prefers. But yes, probation for people who are repeatedly assholes about AI posting makes more sense than anything else, here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 15:41
|
|
|
If I'm reading Leperflesh correctly they're just asking for like a section to just mention that basically there is a debate, inform people of what the debate is, maybe list of points on either side, for the purpose of informing newcomers what the issues are and they should do their own research and reach their own conclusions rather than having that discussion in the thread. And as mentioned above the disclaimer section can also always point to the D&D thread. Primarily so that if someone enters the thread with say, the good intentioned idea of trying to inform people in the thread, "Hey guys aren't you aware there's problems with AI?" we can point to the OP and say "Heya, we're all aware, thanks." Some kind of disclaiming around a controversial new technology that does have some legitimate issues with it does seem reasonable to me. The entire intent seems to me to have the good intentions of the thread's participants at heart. I'd offer to help right the OP but I actually don't know very much about it as I haven't really dabbled with AI myself, I slapped some prompts into DALLE once, waiting an hour and got something completely unusable and now I'm just an orphan child staring inside a shop window sighing at what could have been.  I could try to slap something together copying from Rutibex's post, gurragadon's, and so on and see where that gets us. But yeah I'd like to repeat though what I've been saying in the feedback thread that I am concerned that if the AI thread becomes the containment thread for all AI posting you're just tossing the can down the sidewalk. I feel like what that says is it endorses the position that anyone using AI is doing something morally wrong; and that's kinda lovely. I strongly urge that the purpose of the thread is where "AI chat" can go, for people to discuss using and how to use the technology, with looser rules on what counters as effortful content; but outside the thread there is not a total ban on ALL AI posting, only AI posting that is low effort; and presumably meta discussion around AI which can go to D&D. That would in my opinion the most fair way of handling this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 15:46
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:If I'm reading Leperflesh correctly they're just asking for like a section to just mention that basically there is a debate, inform people of what the debate is, maybe list of points on either side, for the purpose of informing newcomers what the issues are and they should do their own research and reach their own conclusions rather than having that discussion in the thread. And as mentioned above the disclaimer section can also always point to the D&D thread. This is my intent, yes. Doctor Zero posted:That’s actually a good point. If the rule is you can get probed for off topic AI shitposting, you should also get probed for off-topic anti-AI shitposting. This should absolutely be the nature of the rule. My goal is not to settle a debate, it's to stop that debate from constantly making GBS threads up threads, including this one or its successor. I see this as not especially different from how I approach the fact we host threads for games made by unethical companies; I use moderation tools to make it clear that the people posting in the Magic thread do not have to answer for the crimes of Wizards of the Coast, but it is also actually OK to sometimes post in the Magic thread "holy poo poo they sent Pinkertons? gently caress these people" as long as that's not directed at specific posters. And yet, for a while a poster sported a redtext because they were perceived as having defended Pinkerton-sending, and that is kinda within bounds too, you know? (what they actually said was basically 'you should expect this, every corporation does this, why is anyone shocked' but their wording was open to misinterpretation, I think.) This is still SA, people gonna get mad and we do not have a kumbaya forum. So there's a gray area, mod discretion is in play, people may press the edges of it and I hope folks are prepared for some degree of rowdiness, as is the culture for SA at large. I cannot promise you folks an absolute safe space where nobody can ever say "boo." I can say that at least quite a few folks in the feedback thread expressed a desire to just not look in the AI thread and leave people there alone, and if that prevails, everything should work out, more or less. Megazver posted:Leperflesh, do you not see how this is getting more and more weird and discriminatory? And it's you who keeps proposing these bizarre new rule changes, like, what are you doing? I must admit, I am starting to feel less and less like "this must be so hard on you, you poor thing" at this point. I'm not, actually, the one proposing rules, but I have tried to restate the proposals that have been made. Most of it is rules for the whole forum, and the focus is on disallowing stupid recurring slapfights. But I would want to set something in place in the OP of a rebooted AI art thread that made it clear that there are strict limits on coming into that thread to attack its posters by repeating the already well-understood criticisms which, perhaps, we can summarize in the OP so that we can point to them and say "look this is already understood, please stop." And if what we try doesn't work, we'll try something else. Nothing is set in stone. The tools will evolve, the debate will evolve, people will evolve, we'll cross bridges as we come to them. quote:If someone wants to talk about how AI Art is Theft or Not Theft, this is also shitposting that's not allowed in the regular discussion threads. I understand that the people who are actually making GBS threads up all the discussion threads, and also for some strange reason you, don't seem to think that it's this poo poo that should be quarantined to its own thread. At this point, I don't see why I am supposed to care. If you can't moderate them, quarantine them to their own thread as well. Yeah I see no reason why that needs to be endlessly debated in Trad Games. There are other AI threads on SA, including ones in D&D, CC, and GBS, that seem to be chugging along fine and I think TG ought to be able to do the same. We have seen that the debate, even when closely watched by mods, descends into irreconcilable armed camps and absolutely nobody is being moved or convinced. Please believe me that my goal is not to have one side "win" here. If we need to establish a DMZ and the terms of a truce, then so be it. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Jun 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
Rather than "here is a bunch of self-flagellation in the OP to show we are sufficiently contrite about how absolutely completely terrible the subject of the thread is" perhaps the strict limits on coming into the thread to attack people could take the form of a simple "don't poo poo up the thread."
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Rather than "here is a bunch of self-flagellation in the OP to show we are sufficiently contrite about how absolutely completely terrible the subject of the thread is" perhaps the strict limits on coming into the thread to attack people could take the form of a simple "don't poo poo up the thread." I don't really think that's the intent at all and don't think it'd sound that way. Being like, "Look, I know guns are dangerous, but they're really interesting pieces of engineering, fun to go pew at tin cans, and have neat historical value" isn't anywhere near akin to self-flagellation. We can at the very least acknowledge that there are reasons to be concerned, acknowledging them doesn't mean needing to feel bad, its being emphatic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
You could put a disclaimer like "Yes this subject can be controversial, take that to these threads. Don't poo poo up this thread." The thing is, the "controversy" doesn't relate to using these tools personally for TG gaming. The two points against it are about ethics and creativity. It's not unethical to directly use someone's art for your home dnd game, let alone use an abstracted amalgam of it. Creativity wise it clearly can be used creatively so it descends into a pointless argument about what is and isn't art. So if you want an OP with all that stuff you are gonna have to get someone who hates the thread to write it because otherwise it's gonna be one of us writing it sarcastically or you mods writing an even handed but completely out of place OP about ethics in order to avoid a discussion of... Ethics. I don't mind the first option though if we can all just move on and post anyway with a funny hostile OP but you'd need to probe thread shitters. E you could have the op point to the generators that are trained on images that are fully open license and whatnot but I still don't think it's an ethical issue to use copyrighted stuff - or even some theoretical artwork the artist has insisted nobody else is allowed to use in their dnd game - in your personal hobbies Communist Thoughts fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Jun 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 21:31
|
|
|
Do not force the people who want to talk about a subject to give a performative airing of their detractor's grievances in the thread's OP. How hard is it to say "the thread is for personal use of AI art in TTRPGs, it's not for the discussion of AI ethics, that controversy belongs in <link to D&D thread>". I understand the need for containment threads - certain topics are divisive, emotionally charged, and scary to people and sometimes posters can't be civil about them - but this seems like such an obvious overreaction. I support a general AI art ban for art threads, that's the reasonable compromise. I wouldn't want to participate in a thread with an OP containing some bullshit mea culpa to people who think I'm an rear end in a top hat. Count me out. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Jun 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 22:38
|
|
|
just a lurker in tg, but i agree with the 'take the debate to the debate forum, don't poo poo up this thread' and then enforce that you don't have to add some sort of self flagellation to the op
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 23:33
|
|
|
What about something like:
Do you feel even this much language acknowledging that there is a debate is self-flagellation?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 00:10
|
|
|
Lol that the thread is getting vote bombed now, the last gasp of a desperate angry few. EDIT: To contribute, I think everything you suggest in those bullet points does sound pretty reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 00:11
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:What about something like: The parts italicized are not really needed as they just say "the choice is theirs/yours" which everybody already knows. Everything else is fine in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:What about something like: I think the first point should be rephrased to be something like that, "by posting in this thread you're agreeing that this thread isn't about confronting people for utilizing generative AI tools." Phrasing as "these people are comfortable with what they're doing" has implications of "They knew the risks.  "I think the second point should be removed and changed into something like "Here's a list of tools that claim to be trained on content in the public domain, give them a try if that is something you'd be more comfortable with given the above mentioned concerns." Point of fact this thread already had a disclaimer that was probably pretty good? "4) Don't debate AI image ethics: While it's important to consider the ethical implications of AI, this thread should focus on the practical use of AI tools for roleplaying." Bolding me. So we should probably incorporate something like that, I'd rephrase as "this thread is focused on the practical use of generative AI tools for roleplaying games." Otherwise they're generally fine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 01:13
|
|
|
Yeah a problem with Rutibex's rules is that he never checked with mods, he just posted them and then I guess expected mods to enforce them. Part of the reason I was suggesting a mod-written set of rules would be to make it clear this was going to be enforced. Raenir Salazar posted:I think the first point should be rephrased to be something like that, "by posting in this thread you're agreeing that this thread isn't about confronting people for utilizing generative AI tools." This sounds sort of like a EULA or something, I'd like to phrase this in a less legalistic sounding way. What if we just cut that first clause and say "This thread isn't about confronting people for utilizing generative AI tools". quote:I think the second point should be removed and changed into something like "Here's a list of tools that claim to be trained on content in the public domain, give them a try if that is something you'd be more comfortable with given the above mentioned concerns." Sure, and this is why I am hoping for a volunteer knowledgeable on the subject. The only one I know about is the Adobe tool. quote:"this thread is focused on the practical use of generative AI tools for roleplaying games." I'd also be fine with this, but I'd expand it to games in general - TG is about RPGs, boardgames, card games, and party games like Mafia, and I'd like this thread to serve all of these types of gamers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 01:19
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:What about something like: everyone who'll post here is well aware of the debate. the points of the debate aren't relative to the purpose of the thread. just leave it at take it to the proper threads and enforce that again, i just lurk this subforum, so it won't effect my posting, just putting out my opinions on what i would rather read
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 02:15
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:just cut it to the last paragraph While I agree with the sentiment you're expressing, the purpose of the proposed rules isn't for the posters in this thread, it's to appease four extremely vocal posters (one of which is a mod) in the feedback thread. Which is futile, because nothing short of a complete ban will actually appease them, but that's where things stand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 02:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
gently caress 'em i say
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 03:07
|
|